- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I swear we try to do this every decade. It never works. But here we go again – what we should be calling the church or the name of our church. Quote:If anyone cares we should just shorten the name to the Church of Jesus Christ. And then act like it.
The snarky side of me says if the Almighty didn’t want us to be called LDS or Mormons He should have given His church a simpler name. If something has a long name humans will shorten it. That being said I understand the desire to not be called Mormons, especially in contrast to polygamists. I had an argument with my very orthodox brother in law one time when I explained that the term “Mormons” is non-technical and a fairly general term for anyone who believes in the Book of Mormon, including polygamists. He got pretty upset, but the bottom line is that although the LDS church is the largest, there are many denominations who claim to be Mormon. Church of Jesus Christ is too generic. There are a dozen organizations with names like that. Isn’t the church website lds.org? Or mormon.org? I don’t think either are offensive.
Roadrunner wrote:
That being said I understand the desire to not be called Mormons, especially in contrast to polygamists. I had an argument with my very orthodox brother in law one time when I explained that the term “Mormons” is non-technical and a fairly general term for anyone who believes in the Book of Mormon, including polygamists. He got pretty upset, but the bottom line is that although the LDS church is the largest, there are many denominations who claim to be Mormon.
The Community of Christ/RLDS don’t like the term apparently.
I’ve no issue with it.
Like Mom says, I’ve heard this before. As I recall the last time it was tried the church finally relented and decided it was OK to use Mormon to refer to ourselves, but not “Mormon Church.” I don’t disagree with that, and I don’t think others will stop calling us Mormons no matter what we say. Despite the AP Style Guide I see the church referred to as Church of Latter Day Saints all the time in print. That said, I do look forward to visiting TheChurchofJesusChristofLatter-daySaints.org.
🙄 Exactly, they can’t control other people and at least it’s not an offensive nickname like say, Papists or Holy Roller. SamBee wrote:
Church of Jesus Christ is too generic. There are a dozen organizations with names like that.
I completely agree. I have seen many churches using the name “the Church of Jesus Christ”. I’m also not a fan of “the Restored Church of Jesus Christ”, they kept emphasizing. For some reason, it just didn’t sit right with me. It’s like they were trying to choose their own nickname. Combined with the fact that many people, upon hearing that name, would think “Nuh-Uh!”.
The fact is, if your organization has a long name (something more than a word or two), people are going to abbreviate it and/or give you a nickname. Hence we have “the Mormons”.
It get’s better. Brother Joseph, the first Mormon Prophet, said the following, Quote:To the Editor of the Times & Seasons:
Sir – Through the medium of your paper, I wish to correct an error among men that profess to be learned, liberal and wise; and I do it more than cheerfully. . . .The error I speak of, is the definition of the word “Mormon”. It has been stated that this word was derived from the Greek word “mormo”. This is not the case. There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated the Book of Mormon.”
After lengthy explanations Joseph Smith writes,
Quote:We say from the Saxon “good”; the Dutch “god”; the Goth, “goda” …. and the Egyptian, “mon”. Hence with the addition of more or the contraction of “mor”, we have the world “mormon”; which means, literally, “more good.” – Yours, JOSEPH SMITH
If Mormon was good enough for Joseph – it’s good enough for me.
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith page. 300.
Quote:· The term “Mormonism” is inaccurate and should not be used. When describing the combination of doctrine, culture and lifestyle unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the term “the restored gospel of Jesus Christ” is accurate and preferred.
Really? The term “the restored gospel of Jesus Christ” is accurate to refer to the culture and lifestyle of church members? As in, “The restored gospel of Jesus Christ really sticks in my craw.” or “Within the restored gospel of Jesus Christ people can be overly insular, and judgmental, even unchristian” or “In the restored gospel of Jesus Christ some people discourage the use of face cards or consumption of caffienated sodas.”???
I always wonder if there are not legal underpinnings for much of the changes that the church makes. I am convinced that the church took away custodians because of workman’s comp, OSHA, and fair labor standards act issues. Also the Family Proc. and later POX make sense as a legal bulwark against ever being “forced” to accept or normalize homosexuality or gay marriage. I do know that the church has no legal claim to the word Mormon. No copyright or trademark. I could start up a Mormon church tomorrow (or write a Mormon Book or play) and the CoJCoLDS would not be able to do anything about it. however, if this is a legal strategy I am not sure what the endgame might be. Other than forcing everyone into awkward phrasing with nebulous meanings – I do not really see an advantage.
I do find it somewhat ironic that this is being framed as a revelation – but it is basically the same thing that Elder Nelson asked of us way back in 1990.
Roy wrote:I do find it somewhat ironic that this is being framed as a revelation – but it is basically the same thing that Elder Nelson asked of us way back in 1990.
Just my opinion, but I think RMN is prone to pulling the revelation card as a power play. On the other hand, I suppose it does depend on one’s definition of revelation.
And, I already have issues with trying to assert that we’re better or more right than other churches or religions. The restored Church of Jesus Christ? Give me a break. If Christ organized a church, and I don’t see the evidence he did, this is far from that.
I agree with the other comments here. I think this really cheapens the idea of revelation. With all that is going on right now, why would God take a firm stand on this issue? Especially when we’ve been here before and it has not worked. This thought occurred to me: I think the bigger struggle with dropping Mormon comes outside the church as opposed to inside. The RLDS changed their name to the Community of Christ in 2001. How long did it take before that was regularly accepted and used by the world? (Most of the world probably didn’t notice or care, actually.) I live in Arizona, which is no Utah, and this made the morning news. The two news anchors respectfully asked “why?” In their view Mormon was simply an easy nickname and held no negative connotation. Interestingly they also said that many members of the church were questioning this decision and that they would interview some members about it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.